Inadequate signage?

Moggy11

I’d be grateful for any advice or opinions.

Wright Hassall have recently rejected my POPLA appeal. It was submitted over a year ago before the Beavis case and I’d appealed because of inadequate signage, no breach of contract due to unclear terms, GPEOL, and questioned their legal status to issue parking charges. I have no confidence that Wright Hassall have given an independent judgement on my appeal as I've also read that they work for some Private Parking Companies. The letter from Wright Hassall informing me of my appeal outcome is also identical to several others I have seen posted on forums which make me doubt my case has been considered individually. It gives brief reasons for rejecting my GPEOL, inadequate signage and legal status arguments, but does not appear to have considered my concerns about unclear terms of contract .

Despite the verdict from Wright Hassall, I still strongly feel the signage is inadequate to clearly inform me of the terms and conditions of parking. I’m wondering whether to accept the risk of being taken to court as I would at least feel more confident about getting an independent judgement there. Do the forum members have any experience of whether the signage for this specific PPC has been challenged in court before? I found a newspaper report that a challenge on the size of the sign was unsuccessful. Or do you feel I am wasting my time and that the Terms and Conditions displayed are adequate to form a clear and fair contract?

I’ve hope I've attached pictures of the signs.

[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]s[/FONT]1347.photobucket.com/user/neilb[FONT=&quot]!!![/FONT]2/media/All%203%20signs_zpsdwrxlsg4.jpg.html[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]s1347.photobucket.com/user/neilb[FONT=&quot]!!![/FONT]2/media/CCC%20sign_zpspjju26xr.jpg.html[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]s1347.photobucket.com/user/neilb!!!2/media/Exchequer%20Quay%20sign_zps5ffegqi5.jpg.html[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]s1347.photobucket.com/user/neilb!!!2/media/Armtarc%20sign_zpswiujmhd6.jpg.html[/FONT]


The car park in question has an hour of free parking and has no pay and display machines or signage to indicate a permit is needed. The PCN was issued for overstaying the hour of free parking. However, none of the signs from the Harbourmaster, Cornwall County Council nor the PPC warn that a PCN will be issued for overstaying the free parking.

Thank you for any replies.

Moggy11

Sorry, I can't get the link to the photos to work. I realise my questions are difficult to answer without them. Any advice on how to post the link? Thanks.

pappa_golf

Harbourmaster, Cornwall County Council


sorry cannot see pictures , could this land come under bylaws , or is it county counsil owned?
who is the parking co involved


as you will not be able to do a link with google maps , can you give the location and postcode of the site

Fruitcake

To post pictures, upload them to a web hosting site such as tinypic or photobucket, then post the URL here. Change http to hxxp and someone here will chage it back to a live link.

Make sure the picture hosting site is not in your real name, the images are redacted, and there are no other pictures or albums that can be traced back to you.

DoaM

I take it the !!! in your links is a s s ?

Moggy11

Thanks for the advice on posting pictures. It's definitely not a s s, something much more boring but it was changed every time I tried to submit the post..


Here is a second go at posting the signs, the name of the car park is clear from these.


[IMG]hxxp://i65.tinypic.com/9ktb3a.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]hxxp://i66.tinypic.com/2ajumnt.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]hxxp://i68.tinypic.com/xbhfh4.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]hxxp://i63.tinypic.com/5tt34k.jpg[/IMG]


I haven't been able to find out if it is covered by byelaws, but there is signage from Cornwall County Council


Thanks again

Moggy11

The location and postcode is Penryn TR10 8LS

Fruitcake

Moggy11 wrote: »

Thanks for the advice on posting pictures. It's definitely not a s s, something much more boring but it was changed every time I tried to submit the post..


Here is a second go at posting the signs, the name of the car park is clear from these.


[IMG]hxxp://i65.tinypic.com/9ktb3a.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]hxxp://i66.tinypic.com/2ajumnt.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]hxxp://i68.tinypic.com/xbhfh4.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]hxxp://i63.tinypic.com/5tt34k.jpg[/IMG]


I haven't been able to find out if it is covered by byelaws, but there is signage from Cornwall County Council


Thanks again

http://i65.tinypic.com/9ktb3a.jpg
http://i66.tinypic.com/2ajumnt.jpg
http://i68.tinypic.com/xbhfh4.jpg
http://i63.tinypic.com/5tt34k.jpg

pappa_golf

I say "do one" KBT , WH should not have heard the case as the land is owned and run by the county counsil and as such is non applicable to be heard under POPLa

Fruitcake

This may be one of the places where the local council have sub-contracted parking operations to a private company.
They are not allowed to do that.

The Armtrac sign uses a premium rate 'phone number which is a BPA and ICO breach.

I would contact the council about this and ask if it is a council or private car park. I would also do a search to find out if Byelaws apply.

Wait for the more experienced members to give you further advice.

Coupon-mad

The Harbour Master's sign here is the only clear one:

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=xbhfh4&s=9#.WApKD-ArLIU

...and it has no mention of any offer to park otherwise, nor anything about any 'charge'. And the fact is this is not relevant land (did you ever say who was driving?). It is a scandal that WH have decided that the small print in Armtrac's own signs are 'clear' when viewed next to that Harbourmaster one which IS in large letters. What did WH say exactly? We'd like a laugh!

Despite the verdict from Wright Hassall, I still strongly feel the signage is inadequate to clearly inform me of the terms and conditions of parking. I’m wondering whether to accept the risk of being taken to court

I agree, I would. Especially as when Armtrac try the odd claim (very oddly!) they use Gladstones solicitors; look at how they muck up cases:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=GLADSTONES

I would not be concerned. Come back when you get a Gladstones letter or claim, and search on here and on pepipoo for how to respond and defend:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

Just search both forums for the word 'Gladstones' and you will see the defences flying in on both forums, plus the Prankster's blogs also flying in. All these from this month and some great quotes for defences about Gladstones Particulars of Claim being 'incoherent':

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/as-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/link-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/horizon-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/ukpc-youve-been-gladstoned.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/ace-security-youve-been-gladstoned.html

Bad signage is one of the most common reasons people win these cases when the odd one reaches a hearing. Gladstones normally go very quiet when they see a forum defence though. Have not seen one here get off the ground after a defence has been filed by one of our posters.